From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: (from weis@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id EAA16634 for caml-redistribution; Thu, 2 Jul 1998 04:19:52 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id LAA23397 for <caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr>; Wed, 1 Jul 1998 11:26:27 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from tobago.inria.fr (tobago.inria.fr [128.93.8.21])
	by concorde.inria.fr (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA18578
	for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Wed, 1 Jul 1998 11:26:25 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: (from doligez@localhost) by tobago.inria.fr (8.6.10/8.6.6) id LAA20020 for caml-list@inria.fr; Wed, 1 Jul 1998 11:26:25 +0200
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 1998 11:26:25 +0200
From: Damien Doligez <Damien.Doligez@inria.fr>
Message-Id: <199807010926.LAA20020@tobago.inria.fr>
To: caml-list@inria.fr
Subject: Re: Garbage collection qustion
Sender: weis


>From: Ohad Rodeh <orodeh@cs.huji.ac.il>

>[allocation: minor=0.0M (4% promoted) (direct major=0K)|collections:
>minor=1, major=0, compact=0|words: 63488 (0% live) (1 chunks)|blocks: 120
>(99% live) (largest_free=62878)]
[...]
>[allocation: minor=2.7M (0% promoted) (direct major=0K)|collections:
>minor=91, major=21, compact=3|words: 63488 (1% live) (1 chunks)|blocks:
>255 (99% live) (largest_free=62343)]

I think you are misinterpreting the numbers.  The relevant variable
here is heap_words, which doesn't increase at all.

Does the size of your process (as reported by ps) actually increase ?

-- Damien